9911796707
TMI Blog1999 (8) TMI 354X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : P.C. Jain, Vice President]. Briefly stated relevant facts of the case are as follows :- 1.1 The appellants herein are manufacturing cement from clinker. It is also manufactured by them but entirely used captively for manufacture of cement. 1.2 Two questions are involved in the impugned order :- (i) Regarding rate of duty on cement, the final ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ging duty. This explanation has been held by the Tribunal in a number of judgments as giving exemption to goods manufactured within the factory and captively used. For this proposition, learned Consultant relies on two judgments of the Tribunal :- 1. 1994 (74) E.L.T. 942 - J.G. Engineers v. Collector of Central Excise, Meerut. 2. 1999 (32) R.L.T. 645 - Olympic Bearing P. Ltd. Ors. v. Commiss ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e finding of the lower authority which has held that Explanation VI to Notification 1/93 merely states that value of goods manufactured by the appellants within the factory and captively consumed in the manufacture of specified goods covered by Notification 1/93 are not to be taken into account. This Explanation cannot be read as giving an exemption to the goods manufactured within the factory and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
